JRobin (Agnostic?) Knows The Truth!

[@youarevictoria4981]

"How can I see something that is not physical..." exactly.

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Great point!

[@Dizerner]

I only believe in things I can see, like black holes.

[@Rev-bb9ej]

The reverse presup troll is the gift that keeps on giving. 🤣

[@realBreakfasttacos]

I'm glad you enjoy it!

[@bertthompson4748]

Its so funny when an apologist is broken out of being the one asking the questions and suddenly find a sense of humour and sarcasm

[@realBreakfasttacos]

I love this stuff!

[@smolderingtitan]

P1: My ability to reason comes from the existence of God. P2: I am unable to reason. C: God does not exist.

[@Pinworm]

More evidence that everyone is born an atheist and remain one until indoctrinated. Babies and toddlers cannot reason.

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Great point!

[@JeffersonSpatchcock]

JRobin saying he’s agnostic about God’s non-existence is a lie and a devastating admission that he may have been grifting for Jesus for years. 🤔

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Great point!

[@wilberforce1826]

So weird how, when faced with presup that proves them wrong, they become a caricature of what they think atheists say and start asking "what's the argument for..." about literally every word.

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Very good point!

[@vex1669]

The "Jordan Peterson Defense".

[@TheGlobuleReturns]

‘Prove it’ was a trend/game some people at my school used to play where they just kept saying that to everything and the other person would try and keep answering until it was impossible. Who would have thought years later it would become a dead serious and unironic tactic to defend the existence of god on discord.

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Very great point!

[@seawolf7649]

LOL --- I like the catch phrase "main character in the battle of good and evil" JRobin attempted to balk at. Imma use that one now.

[@realBreakfasttacos]

You should! It's so fun to say!

[@Qzopr1]

Having "JRobin" in the title is reason enough to pass on the video. His ignorance is only surpassed by his smugness. I'll try but make no promises. Thanks Taco.

[@realBreakfasttacos]

LOL

[@littlefurrow2437]

Yeah... it's the ONLY reason I viewed it.

[@realdjungleskog]

One of the funniest things about these guys is that they have no sense of irony or self-awareness. I heard one of them (not Jrobin) say, at one point, "It's like talking to a bot." They're THIIIIIS close to getting the point.

[@Bubblewench42]

Too true

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Excellent point!

[@FRMurOWNopinion]

Taco, I think your catch phrase of “why do you want to be a main character in the battle of good vs evil so badly” is pretty cool

[@realBreakfasttacos]

That makes me so happy!!

[@jasonblackmore8904]

I saw a jrobin video, and i just had to turn it on and watch. He's amazing at accepting premises that destroy his worldview. Then, when it's explained how it does that, he backtracks and claims he never said that, it doesnt ’t mean that, or asks whats the argument for that? I havent watched this yet. Did i get it right? Lol.

[@Bubblewench42]

LMBO

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Absolutely!

[@benlinus1310]

The infinite regress is not a formal fallacy in philosophy as far as I know. Even so, wouldn't God have the same problem?

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Great point!

[@smolderingtitan]

What could I read to understand whether infinite regress is a fallacy or not?

[@ottomaddoxx5360]

JRob should have continued to remain silent on the internet, instead of jumping on after having quit for a while. I thought for a second he might have gotten some sense into him. It was a bad idea for him to try to get back into this stuff.

[@realBreakfasttacos]

JRobin is funny

[@rafaelallenblock]

Here is Darth Dawkins proof: p1If AAAAAYtheistic NAAAAAturalistc ReALLLLLllllity exists then we would be able to reason. p2 We are able to reason therefore conclusion AAAAAAAAAAYtheistic NAAAAAAAAAturalistic ReAALLLLLLLIIIiity exists. Checkmate.

[@babotond]

shouldn't p1 be more like if AAAAAYtheistic NAAAAATuralistic reAAAALity didn't exist, we wouldn't be able to reason? because otherwise it's affirming the consequent.

[@rafaelallenblock]

@@babotond That's the whole joke: DDs arguments, despite being corrected multiple times, revolve around affirming the consequent. Google "Darth Does Logic" and enjoy

[@babotond]

@@rafaelallenblock my mistake, sorry lol

[@derkylos]

@@babotond Affiliating the consistent, you mean, surely?

[@babotond]

@@derkylos i said what i said, and don't call me shirley.

[@Ryan-ww5xt]

You remind me of a character from office space… i am adverse lol however i love your atheistic presup so ill suck it up and enjoy your awesome content

[@realBreakfasttacos]

That is funny!

[@vex1669]

I am low-key amazed that he seriously doesn't get your point.

[@realBreakfasttacos]

They never do

[@Altitudes]

This is what they do...

[@realBreakfasttacos]

THIS IS WHAT THEY DO!

[@smolderingtitan]

JRobin's presupp past comes home to roost.

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Yes!

[@koki84ji7]

Robin is still going? Gets shit on for years and years but dude is still going 😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Yes he is! Sounds like he's Agnostic now.

[@BarrySchanz]

You can't handle the truth 😱

[@realBreakfasttacos]

I think you are confused!

[@babotond]

this is not even bad faith, this is rotten, moldy, cockroaches-wouldn't-touch-it faith jfc

[@realBreakfasttacos]

LOL

[@dbt5224]

I’ve heard JaneRobin talk before. Forget impressive, it’s incoherent.

[@realBreakfasttacos]

LOL

[@kevinaviles30]

0:45 My question is a theist would assert that their “special” revelation comes from god. From a naturalistic perspective where would you receive the “special” revelation from? I get that taco is using the presup argument against these Presup theists, but just curious about that thought I had. I also think I understand the argument that if god reveals himself through our senses and reasoning and the theist has never seen god or any supernatural being or thing then the theist is admitting supernatural beings or things do not exist…I think…any one feel free to correct me if I got it wrong, ty

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Special revelation is just reason silly.

[@JeffersonSpatchcock]

JRobin is not fairing well here.

[@realBreakfasttacos]

LOL

[@Weirdaman]

Literally broken, hahaha, he went into a loop. Hahahah. Gj.

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Yes Looping!!!

[@luisbenitez9892]

11:05 why do you run away and yap when someone has a actual point against your point and you just mute him? I wanted to hear you refute him. And you just kept ignoring his questions. What kind of debate tactic if this?

[@realBreakfasttacos]

It's called hyper focusing JRobin.

[@luisbenitez9892]

@@realBreakfasttacos it also called Running.

[@lightbeforethetunnel]

​@luisbenitez9892 Muting interlocutors ensures fallacies can't be invalidated.

[@LookOutForNumberOne]

JRobin was the old puppet from Darth Dawkins

[@MattSingh1]

*He was demolished a number of times by KingXerxes.*

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Yes he was!

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Xerxes is christian now.

[@davids11131113]

Jrobin about a year ago said he’s moving on from being a ridiculous presuper, he said he needs to get on with his life…but now he’s back here doing presup garbage so I guess he failed at getting on with life.

[@jonparker5728]

Jrobin is back? Oh no🥲

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Sounds like hes agnostic now!

[@dbt5224]

Christian presupps are clearly not of sound mind.

[@realBreakfasttacos]

LOL

[@Boneworm852]

I think you're cool. 😎

[@realBreakfasttacos]

You are cool too!

[@Dizerner]

You just baldly assert your own perceptions have to be 100% accurate and your own reasoning is 100% perfect, then you unjustifiably attribute perfect morality to your own estimations, then you hijack language to bolster your feeling of certainty like "revelation," then you just badger and insult and kick anyone that disagrees with you. That is not a "logically valid" argument.

[@KEvronista]

here's a logically valid argument for you: p1: that which occurs at no time and no place is that which never occurs. p2: creation of the universe ccurred at no time and at no place. c: creation of the universe never occurred. :) KEvron

[@realBreakfasttacos]

Inductive arguments cannot be logically valid silly. Hope in discord and I'll deconvert you real quick.

[@KEvronista]

@@Dizerner *"anyone that[sic] disagrees with you"* jrobin agreed with him. KEvron

[@13shadowwolf]

Reality is Self-Evident and Self-Revelatory. "god" is neither Self-Evident, nor is "god" Self-Revelatory. Theists have had thousands of years stringing together nonsense gibberish and claiming they have created "arguments" for their "god" Without the Thousands of years of Traditions of Accepting Nonsensical Gibberish as "truth", Theism would be treated the same as Scientology.

[@Dizerner]

@@13shadowwolf If reality were self-evident and self-revelatory, why does anyone ever have a wrong opinion about it? Why don't you naturally realize through reason and sense that matter is mostly space? Why does it take further deduction and data to learn that your perceptions are actually deceiving you? Turning it back to theist mistakes is just changing the topic to get out from under the heat. I think theists make the exact same mistakes, so it's irrelevant.